There will be NO HW4 upgrade for HW3 owners

[stopcrazypp]

”The level of driving automation system feature corresponds to the feature’s production design intent ... As such, it is incorrect to classify a level 4 design-intended ADS feature equipped on a test vehicle as level 2 simply because on-road testing requires a test driver to supervise the feature while engaged, and to intervene if necessary to maintain safe operation.” - SAE J3016

I will die on this hill. Haha

Tesla said their design intent is L2 to CA DMV back in December 2020 and the DMV have not been able to make a successful argument otherwise for more than 2 years since that. If they were, FSD Beta would have been immediately halted just like Uber was when they tried to test without a permit, given for FSD Beta Tesla was not following any of the reporting and test driver registration requirements for L3/L4 permits.

Tesla's current system is not a L4 vehicle with a safety driver. This is made clear because it needs a steering wheel nag and the driver to immediately take over (almost guaranteed to crash if driver doesn't). It's not just a driver there to observe the L4 feature, where the car can still safely halt in almost all situations.

The other obvious sign is liability. Mercedes for example is covering the driver from liability for anything that happens when the car is running in L3 mode. Tesla is explicit they do not cover anything that happens when running FSD Beta.

Another point of evidence from the consumer facing side, the agreement when you sign up for FSD Beta says explicitly: FSD Beta does not make my car autonomous
Doesn't get more clear than that.

When running FSD Beta, you aren't being a test driver of an autonomous vehicle, you are simply running a door-to-door L2 system.

Maybe eventually it'll evolve to a L3/L4/L5 system (which is what Elon is suggesting it would eventually be), but it's clearly not there yet.

When Elon says "feature complete" he is referring to the car simply being able to perform all the actions of driving from location to location (which a L2 car can do also), saying explicitly it applies even when it haven't even reached the point that the person can choose not pay attention (so definitely not even L3), here's the direct quote:
"There’s 3 steps to self-driving: there’s feature complete, then there’s feature complete to the degree that … where we think that the person in the car does not need to pay attention, then there’s at a reliability level where we also convince regulators that that is true"

 

[stopcrazypp]

Nah, that isn’t true.

Watch the Tesla Autonomy Day from April 2019 at 3:31:44.




And the whole “my L5 isn’t your L5” is just some alternative facts business right there. Stop moving the goal posts.

I'm referring to specifically to the section I quoted which does not mention any levels at all. You cut if off and ignored it completely. It mentions how HW4 might be "better" than HW3 regardless of what level you consider, which was your original question. It has nothing to do with SAE Levels, only has to do with safety levels vs humans (which no clear definition/test method is given). As noted, even cars with the same SAE Level can have completely different levels of reliability.

If you want to focus on the definitions Elon uses in other older presentations, see my other responses to others above. The "feature-complete self-driving" that he describes (which he considers a car to explicitly still qualify even if the driver needs to pay attention at all times) matches that of door-to-door L2 systems (like Mobileye's SuperVision Urban L2 mode, GM Ultra Cruise, XPeng City NGP, etc). His definition of L5 (as opposed to L4) is simply that there are no geofences (glossing over the attention part). Under official SAE terminology, there is no separate category for L2 cars that have no geofences (even though there is such a distinction for L4/L5). As noted above, his engineers in correspondence with the DMV (and even the UI as shown in the screenshot that says FSD Beta is not autonomous) use the official definitions, which contradict his.

 

[ddeflyer]

One exceptionally important detail that I haven't seen anyone mention before, Tesla specifically mentions on the order page: "The currently enabled features require active driver supervision ... The activation and use of these features are dependent on ... regulatory approval," Given that L2 ASDS doesn't require regulatory approval in US markets, this is saying that FSD with HW3 is in fact more than L2. If they have been selling hardware which they know is not capable of more than L2 and they are not going to do required retrofits to make the existing vehicles capable of more than L2 then it seems like this is actually rather cut and dried material fraud. They already know (and factually have known for a long time re:HW4) what the limitations of the existing HW3 is (as evidenced by what appears to be rather radical changes for HW4). I bought my Tesla in December primarily on the promised feature set and at this point I'm basically waiting to see what is said at the March investor day to see if I'm going to start legal action (and I'm getting the feeling that I will be).

 

[bobsmy]

July 2019: Elon Quote; "If we make all cars with FSD package self-driving, as planned, any such Tesla should be worth $100k to $200k, as utility increases from ~12 hours/week to ~60 hours/week"

 

[bobsmy]

Back in 2019 and 2020, Tesla marketed the FSD upgrade as the ability of the car to drive itself to the point of being a robotaxi and being worth $100k per year. They also stated that the vehicles being sold at that time had all the hardware required to meet that goal or would be upgraded as needed for those who purchased the FSD upgrade. There was no such product as FSD Beta then , At a later point in time Tesla offered those who purchased the FSD upgrade the ability to participate in the FSD Beta program while FSD was improved. At no point did the participation in the beta program negate the agreement that the FSD upgrade was purchased under.

 

[cdub]

Yes! That is the car (S90D w/ FSD) I purchased in 12/2016. Still waiting.......

Here's the disclaimer at the bottom of that page FYI:

Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction. It is not possible to know exactly when each element of the functionality described above will be available, as this is highly dependent on local regulatory approval. Please note also that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine, but doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year.

 

[KArnold]

doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year.

Tesla Network? Did I miss that? Anyone know what that is? Is "next year" really "this year"?

 

[Daniel in SD]

here's the direct quote:
"There’s 3 steps to self-driving: there’s feature complete, then there’s feature complete to the degree that … where we think that the person in the car does not need to pay attention, then there’s at a reliability level where we also convince regulators that that is true"

I rest my case. In the software world feature complete does not mean the software is done. It will be done when it is reliable enough to be driverless.
You need to listen to more earning calls and it will become clear to you that FSD beta is a beta version of FSD. He talks all the time about the disengagement rate of FSD beta improving to the point where you can remove the driver. The design intent of the system is a driverless.
As you state there are regulatory reasons for Tesla’s lawyers to misclassify it as L2.

 

[2101Guy]

July 2019: Elon Quote; "If we make all cars with FSD package self-driving, as planned, any such Tesla should be worth $100k to $200k, as utility increases from ~12 hours/week to ~60 hours/week"

he just says ANYTHING to get more $ coming in. ANYTHING.

 

[2101Guy]

another move of his is to constantly put it "on the regulators".

as if the technology is already there..not blowing through stop signs, blowing through intersections while in left turn only lanes, not causing pile ups with phantom braking, not speeding through school zones with lower speed limits...thats all done.

Its solely the "regulators" that are holding FSD back.

 

[aataskin]

And the situation will repeat itself with HW4 so the guys who bought USS-less Teslas should not really feel like they will miss much. The HW4 cars will still never be able to drive on their own, their parking functionality will still be disabled until further notice which may never come, etc. This whole thread started with the assumption that HW4 will be superior because it will come with adequate working software that requires all those high definition cameras and radars. That software doesn't exist and never will be. This is Tesla we are talking about, come on. Fool me once - shame on you, fool me twice.. three times.. four times...

 

[DarkForest]

another move of his is to constantly put it "on the regulators".

as if the technology is already there..not blowing through stop signs, blowing through intersections while in left turn only lanes, not causing pile ups with phantom braking, not speeding through school zones with lower speed limits...thats all done.

Its solely the "regulators" that are holding FSD back.

But it's regulators who put the stop signs there. If only regulators would get off our backs about stop signs and left turn only lanes, FSD would be feature complete! /s

 

[KArnold]

OK, I admit I'm way out of my league on this question. We've seen some pretty amazing things with FSDb in the last year. I would not have guessed it would be doing as well as it does today. From what I've seen, in another year or two of similar effort we could see the vast majority of our current mainstream (lane choice, blinkers, smoothness, slowing, NAP, parking, etc.) could become a thing of the past. The edge cases will be there for quite a while of course.

Are yous confident AP3 and the current cameras (plus whatever "free" FSD hardware goodies Elon might offer down the road, if any, i.e., radar perhaps) will never be able to run SAE Level 4 on most US roads regardless of time/software development? Is AP3 hardware really the limiting factor here?

I don't recall Elon ever saying AP3 won't do that. Sure, it will be faster and perhaps safer. But I believe that HE believes it is do-able.

 

[Mr. Michael]

The edge cases around here include no knowledge of speed limits (really terrible map data with no ability to even note the problem to Tesla), and winter. Low sun angle causes all kinds of problems with the cameras, and of course, low temperatures fog them up. Not sure why the speed limit is so profoundly difficult for Tesla. Maybe instead of putting in service requests (the only way to tell Tesla) and getting nothing but lies, I need to direct my concerns to NHTSA.

 

[DarkForest]

(really terrible map data with no ability to even note the problem to Tesla)

Elon hates HD maps so much, they use Low Def maps with the lowest quality data possible.

 

[qdeathstar]

There is no possible way to retrofit HW4 to current cars period. Greentheonly on Twitter has confirmed this and he has always been right. Whether you pay 10K or free of charge it's not happening.

Define no possible way? I’m sure it is physically possible. If you can convert a 1954 F100 from gas go electric, surely swapping out hardware is possible.

 

[qdeathstar]

Apple or Steve Jobs never sold a product that was not even there. That's the difference.

iCloud?????

 

[Mr. Michael]

Elon hates HD maps so much, they use Low Def maps with the lowest quality data possible.

I can vouch for the data being very low quality. I have a case where there is a 55mph sign, the car accelerates for almost 5 seconds (from being in a 25mph town) and then defaults to the bad map data and slows down to 35 (in the absence of any sign). This has been very repeatable for over a year now (since they started to recognize, but apparently not care about, speed limit signs). Happens on the fsdB and also regular autopilot. I have brought this up to them many times. They lie about it (telling me its state government that causes this???:?) and just don’t care. I actually checked with state government and Tesla has never contacted them about speed limit data or any map data.

 

[KArnold]

There is a brand new stop light being installed near me, so I assume it's not on any maps yet. They are not yet activated and covered in canvas but they are hung. There's a peak of the yellow frame showing around the cover but 98% is covered and certainly no lights are activated. FSDb gets confused and slows considerably like a PB. The ICU very quickly shows a shadow of a stop signal with a red light illuminated for about 1 second but then it disappears. I'm actually quite surprised it is recognized as a stop light at all by FSDb. Interesting behavior.

 

[Supcom]

There is a brand new stop light being installed near me, so I assume it's not on any maps yet. They are not yet activated and covered in canvas but they are hung. There's a peak of the yellow frame showing around the cover but 98% is covered and certainly no lights are activated. FSDb gets confused and slows considerably like a PB. The ICU very quickly shows a shadow of a stop signal with a red light illuminated for about 1 second but then it disappears. I'm actually quite surprised it is recognized as a stop light at all by FSDb. Interesting behavior.

There is a new traffic light on a road I frequently use. The car responds to it perfectly well despite not having received any map updates since the light was installed.